admin

[Criminal Appeal No.781 of 2012] Dipak Misra, J. 1. The present appeal projects and frescoes a scenario which is not only disturbing but also has the potentiality to create a stir compelling one to ponder in a perturbed state how some unscrupulous, unprincipled and deviant litigants can ingeniously and innovatively design in a nonchalant manner […]

[Criminal Appeal No. 471 of 2015 arising out of SLP (CRL) No. 5295 of 2014] [Criminal Appeal No. 472 of 2015 arising out of SLP (CRL) No. 5800 of 2014] PRAFULLA C. PANT, J. 1. These appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 25.2.2014 passed by the High Court of Kerala in Criminal M.C.

[Criminal Appeal No. 1424 of 2009] [Criminal Appeal No………….of 2015 arising out of SLP (CRL) No…….CRL. M.P. No. 7170 of 2007] Prafulla C. Pant, J. 1. These appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 8.11.2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No. 1746-SB/2005 whereby the appeal of Sanjiv

[Criminal Appeal No. 338 of 2015 arising out of S.L.P. (CRL.) No.1512 of 2015 (D .No. 5077/2015)] O R D E R Dipak Misra, J. 1. The present appeal, raises the seminal issue whether the appellants, the wife and husband, trustees of two trusts, namely, “Citizens for Justice and Peace” (CJP) and “Sabrang Trust”, should

[Civil Appeal No. 8958 of 2003] A.K.SIKRI,J. The appellant/assessee challenges the correctness and validity of the final order dated 10.10.2002 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT), New Delhi in the appeal which was preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) who had upheld the Order-in-Original dated 17.3.1999

[Civil Appeal No. 6950 of 2009] [Civil Appeal No.6951 of 2009] [Civil Appeal No.6952 of 2009] [Civil Appeal No.6953 of 2009] [Civil Appeal No.6954 of 2009] [Civil Appeal No.6956 of 2009] V.GOPALA GOWDA, J. This group of appeals has been filed by various appellant-Associations questioning the correctness of the common impugned judgment and order dated

[Civil Appeal No. 8192 of 2003] A.K. SIKRI, J. The bare minimum facts which are required to be mentioned to decide this appeal are recapitulated, in brief, herein below: The appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the units of Grasim Industries Limited, which carries on manufacture and sale of cement. It requires raw material in

[Civil Appeal Nos. 8617-8635 of 2003] R. F. NARIMAN, J. The present set of appeals are concerned with the validity of an explanation added retrospectively to Section 26(4) of the Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’). On facts, the present appeals are concerned with the assessment of agricultural income received by

[Criminal Appeal No.2341 of 2011] [Criminal Appeal Nos.2342-2344 of 2011] C. NAGAPPAN, J. 1. All these appeals are filed challenging the impugned common order dated 28.1.2011 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Criminal Misc. Nos.220 to 222 of 2011 whereby the petition filed by the appellants under Section 482 of Criminal